by Jane M. Orient, M.D.
Children who grow up on a farm learn the “facts of life” at an early age, such as the observation in an old song: “They’re laying eggs now/ Just like they used ter/ Ever since that rooster/ Came into our yard.”
All species that propagate by sexual reproduction have two sexes, and every new organism arises from one male and one female gamete. Except in the rare hermaphroditic species, every organism has two different parents, one male and one female, permitting the wonderful variety that exists in the natural world.
One can debate endlessly about the role of nature or nurture in molding a person—or animal—but sex is 100 percent nature. It is not “assigned.” It is recognized at birth, or on a prenatal ultrasound—or hundreds of years later in a skeleton. If there is ambiguity, it is a medical emergency. The newborn needs to be seen immediately by a pediatric endocrinologist because he might die from adrenal insufficiency.
Sexual differentiation begins long before any visible differences—the Y chromosome affects every cell in the body. Skilled persons can sex chicks soon after they hatch.
Gender is a subjective concept these days. If there are not two, how many are there? Three, 50, 83, hundreds? New ones keep getting named. Doctors are being told to be hyperaware so as to treat each patient appropriately, as defined by the person’s self-identity. How about, instead of trying to stuff people into artificially created gender/racial/ethnic boxes, treating everyone as an individual?
There is some yang in every yin, and some yin in every yang, but the yin and the yang exist and are not the same. There is not a womb in a trans-woman, but there is in a trans-man who has not had it removed. We do patients a terrible disservice by pretending to treat organs that aren’t there, or by ignoring organs that are.
Roosters are different, as I learned visiting a farm, where I was attacked by the Bad Rooster. I might have been pecked to death, save for the timely intervention of an 8-year-old boy who thought boys were supposed to protect girls. (I will be his friend for life.)
This brings us to the reason for wanting to sex chicks. A farmer doesn’t want to waste money raising a chicken that doesn’t lay eggs. You only need a few roosters. They fight and are disruptive. Similarly, if you are raising sheep or cattle, you want to be the one who is in charge of the herd—so you castrate most of the males.
Now, if your goal is to have a compliant society of dependent serfs, you need to geld (“detoxify”) the males or make them irrelevant. A father in each family protects his own and works hard so his offspring can thrive. But strong families can thwart the designs of would-be rulers.
For decades, we have tried using Big Daddy/ Big Brother government to look after the flock, and herd it in the proper direction. The results are terrible: poverty, despair, delinquency, drug abuse, and crime.
The stated goals of the growing transgender movement sound noble: make a troubled minority happy, and do away with patriarchy, discrimination, and oppression. And by the way with overpopulation. This assumes we are smarter than Mother Nature.
If we could turn a lot of boys into girls, or at least non-boys, and shame the rest, there would be fewer roosters. True, some girls want to become boys, but while they can grow a beard they cannot increase their muscle strength by 40 percent and their lung capacity by 25 percent, nor can they match a genetic male in bone density and body size. What prevents men from crushing women physically is civilization. Boys must be trained not to hit girls. But if a man “identifies” as a woman, “she” can dominate women in prisons, shelters for abused women, and female sports. The rooster attitude may persist along with the strength.
Would we be better off with women in charge? Women like Catherine the Great, Elizabeth I, “Bloody Mary,” or a modern radical feminist? Or how about a bureaucratic technocracy in which your every thought and deed is monitored—as in Orwell’s 1984.
To eliminate Thought Crime under Ingsoc, it was necessary to make people believe the absurd: that two plus two is not equal to four.
It is equally absurd to say that boys can be turned into girls, or vice versa. But people are being punished professionally for asserting that there are two and only two sexes, determined and fixed by biology.
Could we get rid of natural, complementary sex, and strong men, without getting rid of humanity?
Dr. Jane M. Orient, M.D., has appeared on major television and radio networks in the U.S. speaking about issues related to Healthcare Reform.
She is currently president of Doctors for Disaster Preparedness and has been the chairman of the Public Health Committee of the Pima County (Arizona) Medical Society since 1988.
Dr. Jane Orient has been in solo practice of general internal medicine in Tucson since 1981 and is a clinical lecturer in medicine at the University of Arizona College of Medicine. Her op-eds have been published in hundreds of local and national newspapers, magazines, internet, followed on major blogs and covered in the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times.
Dr. Jane Orient authored YOUR Doctor Is Not In: Healthy Skepticism about National Health Care, published by Crown; the second through fourth editions of Sapira’s Art and Science of Bedside Diagnosis, published by Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; and Sutton’s Law, a novel about where the money is in medicine today.
Dr. Orient’s position on healthcare reform:
“The Healthcare plan will increase individual health insurance costs, and if the federal government puts price controls on the premiums, the companies will simply have to go out of business. Promises are made, but the Plan will deliver higher costs, more hassles, fewer choices, less innovation, and less patient care.”